Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: CPS Mumbai in V Anjaneyulu vs Medical Council Of India on 30 January, 2020Matching Fragments
Furthermore, on receipt of the notice of hearing from the Commission they had forwarded another set of documents with necessary enclosures to the Appellant by post on the address mentioned in the RTI application and that they were willing to send another copy of the same to him by Speed Post / e-mail if so directed by the Commission. During the hearing, the Appellant confirmed his e-mail address ([email protected]) for further necessary action.
The Commission was in receipt of a written submission from the Respondent dated 23.01.2020 wherein it was stated that the RTI application/ First Appeal was replied vide letters dated 25.04.2018 and 27.06.2018 respectively. Furthermore, in compliance with the order of the FAA to the PIO, Registration Section of the Council to furnish the reply in 30 days had inadvertently been missed out. However, a list of Doctors possessing medical qualifications by CPS Bombay enrolled/ registered with the MCI during the year 2008-2009 had been enclosed with the submission.